Home • Bill Wattenburg • Justice • Shocking Facts • Terrorism • Energy • Cars • Environment • Heroes & Villains • Suggested Reading • Fun • Write your government • Contact • About
Trust me—you really don’t know what you’re missing.
The following letter is from Mr. Womack's lawyer, pointing out some problems with CHP officer Russell Moore's sworn statements. You can view images of the original letter (page 1) and its attachments by clicking on the links above.
January 31, 1999
RE: Amador County pursuit of Womack family under guise of prosecution of environmental crimes
As partial corroboration for the necessity of the issuance of that warrant authorizing the second search of the Womack residence at 15864 Ridge Road, Jackson, CA, as well as companion warrant to seize bank records, California Highway Patrolman Russell A. Moore testified in his affidavit, that in essence, a search of the home, as well as seizure of bank records were necessary in order to show a "pattern related to actural ownership of K.R.L. Partnership"; further, he advises that in the earlier, October 30, 1998 search documents seized evidenced that K.R.L. CORPORATION was awarded judgment by the U.S. Government, and although this was a K.R.L. CORPORATION judgment, the attorneys' fees were paid out of a K.R.L. Partnership account. I enclose the first page of this affidavit, and page 15, where these matters are stated by Mr. Moore. I further enclose the last page of the affidavit, to evidence his signature under penalty of perjury.
The information contained in the first paragraph of page 15 is false. I enclose those documents seized in the October 30, 1998 search, and they very clearly show that K.R.L. Partnership received the judgment and that K.R.L. corporation does not exist; indeed, the caption of the case is "K.R.L. Partnership, f/k/a K.R.L. Corporation," etc. The question, all that any ready need do is read the footnote at the bottom of the first page of the Stipulation For Entry of Judgement, where the government explains that K.R.L. is the successor-in-interest to whatever the interest the corporate entity had. I will not comment up what utility or value the "issue" of who or what entity received the judgment should have to any law enforcement authority, unless seizure of assets is a goal.
As attorney of record for the plaintiffs in this matter, it is not my intent, nor shall this communication operate to waive any attorney-client privilege owed to any present or former client; indeed, the entirety of this information is public record and these documents are contained in the file on this action for any reader to peruse should they wish to do so and I cannot fathom why Mr. Moore would have spent "numerous hours trying to locate information related to this judgment without success".
This page was last modified on Monday, 11-Oct-2004 19:06:29 PDT.
